Front Porch Punditry
»
News
»
Science & Medicine
»
American Farmers Abandoning Genetically Modified Seeds: “Non-GMO Crops are more Productive and Profitable”
American Farmers Abandoning Genetically Modified Seeds: “Non-GMO Crops are more Productive and Profitable” January 25, 2014 Daniel Jennings RINF Alternative News
A growing number of farmers are abandoning genetically modified seeds, but it’s not because they are ideologically opposed to the industry.
Simply put, they say non-GMO crops are more productive and profitable.
Modern Farmer magazine discovered that there is a movement among farmers abandoning genetically modified organisms (GMO) because of simple economics.
e get the same or better yields, and we save money up front,” crop consultant and farmer Aaron Bloom said of non-GMO seeds. Bloom has been experimenting with non-GMO seeds for five years and he has discovered that non-GMO is more profitable.
The re-converts to non-GMO seeds are not hippies but conservative Midwestern farmers who are making a business decision, Modern Farmer discovered. They are switching back to natural seed because it is more profitable — not because of any ideology.
“Five years ago the [GMO seeds] worked,” said farmer Christ Huegerich, who along with his father planted GMO seeds. “I didn’t have corn rootworm because of the Bt gene, and I used less pesticide. Now, the worms are adjusting, and the weeds are resistant. Mother Nature adapts.”
Farmers can get paid more for conventional corn than GMO corn. Plus, Huegerich discovered, convention corn can produce more per acre. Modern Farme reported that two years ago, Huegerich planted 320 acres of conventional corn and 1,700 with GMO corn. The conventional fields “yielded 15 to 30 more bushels per acre than the GMO fields, with a profit margin of up to $100 more per acre.” Last year, he planted conventional corn in 750 acres. ............................................
Quote: PzLdr wrote in post #2Another win for the Luddites.
Not necessarily; the luddites may have a good point.
Don't forget the infestation of crony capitalism in our country and the fourth branch of government. The EPA, CDC, FDA, have had their mandates corrupted by politics.
I have spent a lot of time researching how the EPA, FDA, and CDC joined up to remove asthma inhalers using CFC propellants from the market based upon 'global warming' / 'climate change' / the ozone layer.
The timing of the ban coincided with the loss of a patent for inexpensive method of producing medical freon by DuPont. The replacement inhalers was purely a political decision that foisted an inferior product off on the public and protected profits for big international chemical and pharma.
The replacement HFA propellants were tested on some rabbits, a handful of people with very mild asthma, and that was that. No testing was performed on a large number of people, people with serve, chronic asthma, on people with emphysema or any of the other respiratory diseases that benefit from asthma inhalers, cycstic fibrosis, lung cancer asbestosis, etc. The year following the removal of old CFC emergency inhalers from the market showed a statistical increase in deaths from asthma. This inconvenient fact was not studied but pushed the memory hole.
Much of the same can be said for GMO foods.
GMO foods are not as they are advertized the result of improved methods of hybridization, but the result of introducing a gene with a desired trait from another plant, an animal, a bacteria or a virus to a food plant. The desired trait can be resistance to drought or Roundup, or turning the plant into a roundup factory.
Like many modern medications, GMO's have been declared safe based upon the mantra harm from them has not been proven. Of course what you are not told is that no harm is [i]assumed not tested for/i] just like with the replacement of the CFC inhalers.
It is telling that Monsanto spends mega bucks preventing the labeling o GMO foods and products containing GMO foods. Monsanto does not want the market to be given a choice.